Skripal, Syria, And England Are All Victims Of The Globalist War On Trump

S.M.: Alexander Gelyevich, could you comment…on the series of recent events? The plot is thickening. First of all, there is the Skripal affair and its motives.

Alexander Dugin: I am not a specialist on poisonous substances, therefore my analysis is based on deduction. Let’s leave the question of punishing traitors aside – sometimes they are eliminated after they defect, sometimes not. Here there can be no unambiguous solution. All states do this or, in the very least, the majority of them. Betray the Homeland, and be ready to pay for it.

But what is important is the timing of the liquidation. I am absolutely convinced that no one in the Russian Federation would have done this just ahead of the Russian presidential elections and amdist the intensifying confrontation with the US in Ghouta and Syria as a whole. Definitely not now, because there is no possibly worse timing. As follows, these were not our people. And if they are “not ours”, this means they are “not-ours”, i.e., our opponents. Who are our opponents?

Today it is commonplace to curse Theresa May. She is clearly not right, but we are behaving impolitely.  I think that she was not the initiator of this all, nor was the comical bear Boris Johnson. In an article by the former English Ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, a curious theory on the role of the company Orbis Intelligence is offered, in particular implicating Christopher Steele. Most interesting of all is that it was this British company which, on Hillary Clinton’s orders, prepared many of the Russiagate materials, in which Skripal might have played a role. Skripal, not thinking that the affair would obtain such wide publicity, had obsolete and unsubstantiated testimonies put into this phony story, but now that everything has taken the turn of a much more serious investigation as opposed to being mere pre-election nonsense, storm clouds have gathered.

Steele and Orbis Intelligence did not simply get rid of Skripal, but also decided to start a Third World War to divert attention. It is likely that they were spurred to do so by the same globalists behind the Russiagate sham.

S.M.: What was their reasoning?

The US no longer needs England. Therefore, it [England] could be put under the knife in escalating tensions with Russia. If this does indeed lead to escalation, then they can always pull back in the last moment. If not, then in any case Trump, who is not eager to fight Russia, will look like a “traitor to Anglo-Saxon interests.”

In this situation, Theresa May is the victim, not the aggressor. Like England itself. After Brexit, England is an altogether different England. It is our tactical ally in weakening the Atlanticist line in the EU. Therefore, quarreling Russia and England does not benefit England itself, which gets nothing out of this, but the United States as a power.

As follows, Orbis Intelligence should be investigated closer. Craig Murray also points to the likelihood of an Israeli trace. There might very well be one. The presence of Russians in Syria drastically diminishes Israel’s status in the Middle East and ties its hands in Syria and Lebanon. Moreover, as Craig Murray argues, it is the Israelis who are the best experts in poison and poisoning.

Moreover, we are about to have elections, and this is problematic as always. This is perfect timing for a network war operation. But here England is merely a tool. Post-Brexit England is henceforth like Erdogan’s Turkey, a tactical ally of ours rather than an enemy. Take a look and see who this bothers…

S.M.:…What about the escalation in Syria, Ghouta, and the deterioration of US-Russia relations?

AD: Here it is also worth turning to context. The point is that the Trump story is still unfolding. In the beginning he was the spokesman of American right-wing populism. Pre-election Trump, who relied on the American Logos (pragmatism) and Bannon’s conservatism, received the support of more than 62 million Americans. This is a very serious ideological mandate given to fight globalism and the globalist elite (CFR, Clinton, Obama, etc.).

Of course, Trump himself is a pragmatist. He only follows ideas as long as they “work.” Once he got in the White House, he pushed Bannon out and seems to have gone off the rails.

It should be said that the pressure exerted on him by the globalists in staging Russiagate out of nowhere (in fact, as Putin himself admitted, the Russian oligarchs actually financed Hillary Clinton), was really powerful. But not everything is so simple.

Trump has yielded not to the globalists and neocons, whom he has pushed out, but to a different group which has emerged in the forefront – the militarists in the likes of Mattis, McMaster, and their main ideologue, Petraeus, who lurks in the shadows.  They live in nostalgia and believe that the US needs to take revenge for Vietnam. Now they are convincing Trump that “making America great again” is possible only by beating the Russians in Syria.

Trump thinks otherwise. The American populist imagines life otherwise. Those rabid military men are not the Swamp and not the ex-Trotskyist neocons. This is another factor. Trump is now looking for a way to get out of their grip because going with them means losing legitimacy in the eyes of 62 million who did not request a Third World War.

Therefore, Trump removed the senseless thief, Kushner, and is thinking about how to bring Bannon back, for it is Bannon and Trump’s commercial and marketing intuition that link him to his electoral base.

Contrary to forecasts, Trump has started to achieve something. He has almost beaten back Russiagate, gotten back to his beloved wall with Mexico, and economic indices have slightly improved.

This context explains the escalation in Ghouta and partially explains the Skripal affair. In addition to being a rearguard operation of the globalists, this might also be a vanguard attack by the militaristic triad of Mattis, McMaster, and Petraeus.

We are in a very difficult situation. The last thing we need is a Third World War with an uncertain outcome. We have to always be ready for it, as this is the only guarantee that it will not happen. Weakness is an invitation to attack. It would be better if this didn’t happen now…

translated by Jafe Arnold (www.fort-russ.com)